Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 7

[Roussette]

here is Part 6. Nearly time for a new one.

I see what you are saying, Looking. But by my reckoning, if we take it to the extreme no one would ever be responsible for any crime. A guy who had a rough childhood, no father figure, unsupportive family life, etc, could have ended up depressed and without the resources to look after himself properly. So lets say he starts mugging people as a way to get by. His difficult background explains why he went down that road, but it doesn't change his culpability for mugging people.

Could Nel have got mixed up with the 30/3 day thing? I think his English is excellent but he did refer to OP as 11 rather than 11 months a couple of times?

member
As someone observed on twitter recently, his mother must have been one hell of a person; imagine trying to get a young Nel to tidy his room or eat his greens shock That is funny.

There was also something on twitter that someone posted earlier along the lines of "Imagine Gerrie Nel is your dad and you are five minutes late home from a date."

I thought Nel raised an excellent point by saying that despite the psychiatrist saying that it was the amputation of his lower legs at 11months that would have felt like a traumatic assault to a baby, that there were no anxiety issues when he started nursery, etc.

My DD was in hospital with severe bronchiolitis at 10months and we noticed a definite change in her character after the week-long stay. She had always been a very relaxed baby and from then on was clingy to me and had an extra vulnerability. I can well imagine that the operation OP had would have been a very intense experience for a baby to endure. However, I agree with Nel that if this had caused the problem, you would have started to notice issues right away - children do not, and cannot, hide their anxiety.

For me it exposed her thinking as having some bias. It is extremely emotive to bring up the amputation of his legs as the starting point for a lifelong problem with anxiety. But in reality, there was no childhood anxiety that spilled out. How does she therefore know that the operation would have caused anything?

if we take it to the extreme no one would ever be responsible for any crime

But that's why the Court has to find out by what degree this condition may have affected his actions. I'm not saying everyone with GAD is definitely not responsible for his actions - far from it. But the expert witness indicated that in Oscar's case, he MIGHT not be.

We should find that out one way or another.

That's why the whole thing's come as a surprise. Nel was working on the assumption that Oscar, according to all people connected to the case so far, is definitely responsible for his actions. Now the Defence have brought an expert witness who's suggested that that might not be the case. We should find out.

Speedwell that made me laugh. Imagining furtive googling of a young Roux

To the pp , the big dark haired man is captain van ardt, who took the witness statements for the prosecution

His behaviour throughout the trial has been an embarrassment. Laughing, smirking whispering, etc

Can't imagine any of our senior police officers behaving like that in court

Voiceofgod, dd had a skin tumor removed at 11 months. She had to be pinned down for the GA as she had a allergic reaction to the numbing cream and couldn't get a line in. From the moment she woke up she was the same as before.

I guess it depends on the baby\person.

Also bil was born with a heart defect, the doctors told his parents not to treat him any differently. Tell him but dont make a big fuss iyswim.

Anya - that takes me back - yes, she had to be woken and pinned down hourly ( ) for the first 24 hours to be given a Ventolin mask. Until they realised that it wasn't helping because it was bronchiolitis not bronchitis. It was horrific, tortuous watching my little baby being put through that, even though people were trying to help.

I guess it depends on the baby\person.

Yes, this. Again my anecdote was DD having an operation to have an abscess in her mastoid complex removed at 14 months, so a GA with an op, followed by 4 days in hospital on a IV antibiotics. I had to hold her down while the Doctor (who I wanted to smack) checked the drain in her scull while DD screamed blue murder (as you would). DD was fine immediately afterwards. In fact, she was better than she had been previously, and being ill in that way had clearly slowed her down from exploring the world in the way that she'd like.

She also had an emotionally unavailable mother for the first 2 years of her life, and then a volatile, confusing mother for another year when she was 4/5. (I'm a lot better now, following a shedload of treatment.)

She remains the most confident child I have ever known in my life. It's almost freakish.

DS has not been left unscathed by it all, and is quite anxious (though never had an op).

Stuff happens - children react in the way that they react. He may well have been affected, but if this wasn't evident in his behaviour, I don't know how else you'd assess it.

No, I don't know how it would be assessed.

I do think I may explode due to this 3 day 30 day business.

I will explain again.

Nel is applying for a non voluntary assessment. The starting point minimum is 3 days, 72 hours. Nel made no mistake with his language and he said it multiple times. This is the minimum, it suits Nel to refer to the minimum time as it's less threatening to serious delay and sounds very reasonable.

If clinically required to complete a full evaluation this 3 days can be extended to up to 30 days. Roux (and the press) are using this maximum amount (which would be unlikely if the order was granted as we really aren't talking massively complex mental health here) as it suits Roux argument of lengthy unnecessary delay and difficulty to his client.

Please God don't make me have to explain this again!

With all due respect I didn't ask you to explain it

Yes, I think Nel wants to circumvent any chances of appeal with minimum delay. Not sure if 3 day evaluations involve a panel though (psych each for defence,prosecution & neutral), surely panel evaluation safer in countering future appeal?

slightly younger Barry Roux advocatesgroup21.co.za/advocate_senior_members/images/roux_barry.jpg

Yikes Roux has improved with age IMO!

I'm disappointed I'm not going to be able to watch live tomorrow. I have put off riding my poor pony for the last two days but due to bad weather at the weekend he is now very much in need of some work!
By the time I get inside it will be after 11 and I will have missed the decision. Oh well, the argument is the most interesting bit, but then the decision is also going to be very interesting and quite possibly going on from the case histories Nel was quoting, form a president for the future.

I know you didn't ask for explanation member but I just hate to see inaccurate statements and I am compelled to wade in, deepest apologies M'Lady

Regarding the trauma of having his legs amputated, I understood that it was done at a very young age in order to minimise the trauma to him. It seems purely speculative to say it would have been traumatic to him. He would have learnt to do everything without his legs, and would have absolutely no memory of having his legs.

Did someone request an "I luff Nel" badge?

Anybody remember us all saying we could hardly be bothered with the trial this week and had lost interest a bit?!!

voiceofgodot Tue 13-May-14 15:00:20
Anybody remember us all saying we could hardly be bothered with the trial this week and had lost interest a bit?!!

Nooo

Can you imagine being married to Nel? There'd be no 'this old thing I've had it for years' with him.

Its interesting that they are saying he was affected negatively by being encouraged to act 'as normal' and hide his disability, when he has previously said the opposite, especially about his mother. Must be hard for all the family to listen to them talk about her like this.

No me either. I was utterly determined to listen to every word. Ahem.

AGNu THANK you! Love it! I am a member of the Nel Fan Club too... it's his tenacity I admire that's my story and I'm sticking to it

Are they back tomorrow with a decision ? I had to do some work at 11.30am and missed from then on...

I wouldn't be surprised if op was a compulsive liar to be honest.

Am loving the badge!

Yes, Roussette, tomorrow at 9:30 (their time) with a decision on the referral.

Redcoats Can you imagine being married to Nel? There'd be no 'this old thing I've had it for years' with him. I have just snorted tea up my nose reading that!
Can you imagine his questioning?!